GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 260

G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 260 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with Ryzen 7 9800X3D to isolate GPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 260: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each GPU makes more sense in practice: raw FPS, VRAM, features, power draw, pricing, and long-term headroom.

GeForce GTX 1650

2019

Why buy it

✅29.4% more average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
✅Delivers 140.8% more G3D Mark for each dollar spent, at 52.8 vs 21.9 G3D/$ ($149 MSRP vs $139 MSRP).
✅100% more VRAM for high-resolution textures and newer games (4 GB vs 2 GB).
✅Radeon R9 260 is already obsolete for modern gaming, so GeForce GTX 1650 is the less risky modern option long term.
✅Draws 75W instead of 275W, a 200W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Older hardware, 4 GB of VRAM, and weaker feature support mean it will age faster in newer AAA releases.

Radeon R9 260

2013

Why buy it

✅Costs $10 less on MSRP ($139 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower average FPS than GeForce GTX 1650 across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data.
❌Less VRAM, with 2 GB vs 4 GB for high-resolution textures and newer games.
❌2013 hardware with 2 GB of VRAM is already well past its comfortable zone for modern gaming, so it is hard to recommend now.
❌Lower G3D Mark per dollar, at 21.9 vs 52.8 G3D/$ ($139 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
❌266.7% higher power demand at 275W vs 75W.

Quick Answers

Which GPU is faster for gaming right now?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the faster gaming card right now. In our data, it leads by 29.4% in average FPS across 50 tracked games in our benchmark data and by 158.2% in PassMark G3D (7,869 vs 3,048), so the answer here is pretty clean.

Which GPU is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond?

GeForce GTX 1650 is the safer long-term pick for 2026 and beyond. The case is simple: 4 GB vs 2 GB of VRAM, a 12nm process instead of 28nm, and a newer 2019 generation instead of 2013. That gives it more room for heavier textures and higher settings over time.

Which GPU is the better buy today?

GeForce GTX 1650 makes the most sense to buy today. It is $10 more expensive on MSRP at $149 vs $139, and it leads G3D-per-dollar by 140.8% (52.8 vs 21.9), so the value case lines up with the gaming result.

GeForce GTX 1650 vs Radeon R9 260 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

GeForce GTX 1650

The GeForce GTX 1650 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in April 23 2019. It features the Turing architecture. The core clock ranges from 1485 MHz to 1665 MHz. It has 896 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 75W. Manufactured using 12 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 7,869 points. Launch price was $149.

Radeon R9 260

The Radeon R9 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in November 5 2013. It features the GCN 2.0 architecture. The core clock speed is 947 MHz. It has 2560 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 275W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 3,048 points. Launch price was $399.

⚡

Graphics Performance

In G3D Mark, the GeForce GTX 1650 scores 7,869 versus the Radeon R9 260's 3,048 — the GeForce GTX 1650 leads by 158.2%. The GeForce GTX 1650 is built on Turing while the Radeon R9 260 uses GCN 2.0, both on 12 nm vs 28 nm. Shader units: 896 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 2,560 (Radeon R9 260). Raw compute: 2.984 TFLOPS (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 4.849 TFLOPS (Radeon R9 260).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 260
G3D Mark Score	7,869+158%	3,048
Architecture	Turing	GCN 2.0
Process Node	12 nm	28 nm
Shading Units	896	2560+186%
Compute (TFLOPS)	2.984 TFLOPS	4.849 TFLOPS+63%
ROPs	32	64+100%
TMUs	56	160+186%
L1 Cache	896 KB+40%	640 KB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

✨

Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)

The GeForce GTX 1650 gets NVIDIA DLSS, which still tends to look cleaner in motion. The Radeon R9 260 leans on FSR, which is flexible and widely supported, but usually a bit rougher at the same settings.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 260
Upscaling Tech	Upscaling support	FSR Upscaling / FSR 4
Frame Generation	Not Supported	Not Supported
Ray Reconstruction	No	No
Low Latency	NVIDIA Reflex	AMD Anti-Lag

💾

Video Memory (VRAM)

The GeForce GTX 1650 has 4 GB of VRAM, while the Radeon R9 260 carries 2 GB. GeForce GTX 1650 gives you 100% more memory capacity, which matters more once you move into heavier textures, mods, or higher resolutions. Memory bus width is 128-bit on the GeForce GTX 1650 and 128-bit on the Radeon R9 260.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 260
VRAM Capacity	4 GB+100%	2 GB
Memory Type	GDDR5	GDDR5
Memory Bandwidth	128 GB/s	Unknown
Bus Width	128-bit	128-bit
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB

🔌

Power & Dimensions

The GeForce GTX 1650 draws 75W versus the Radeon R9 260's 275W — a 114.3% difference. The GeForce GTX 1650 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 300W (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 450W (Radeon R9 260). Power connectors: None vs 1x 6-pin.

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 260
TDP	75W-73%	275W
Recommended PSU	300W-33%	450W
Power Connector	None	1x 6-pin
Length	229mm	—
Height	111mm	—
Slots	2	—
Temp (Load)	70°C	—
Perf/Watt	104.9+845%	11.1

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the GeForce GTX 1650 came in at $149, while the Radeon R9 260 launched at $139. On MSRP, Radeon R9 260 was 6.7% cheaper ($10 less). Performance per dollar on MSRP (G3D Mark / MSRP): 52.8 (GeForce GTX 1650) vs 21.9 (Radeon R9 260) — the GeForce GTX 1650 offers 141.1% better value. The newer card here is GeForce GTX 1650 (2019 vs 2013).

Feature	GeForce GTX 1650	Radeon R9 260
MSRP	$149	$139-7%
Performance per Dollar	52.8+141%	21.9
Codename	TU117	Hawaii
Release	April 23 2019	November 5 2013
Ranking	#323	#316

Search GeForce GTX 1650 on Amazon

Search Radeon R9 260 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.